Skip to main content

About this Show





San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Virtual Ch. 110 (CSPAN3)






Washington 15, America 7, Us 4, Florida 4, Iowa 3, Texas 2, U.s. 2, D.c. 2, Maryland 2, Marcy 1, Eric 1, Obama Administration 1, Obama Care 1, United States Senate 1, Rick Perry 1, American Economy 1, Kirkwood 1, John Boehner 1, Todd Gillman 1, Todd Gilman 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  CSPAN    [untitled]  

    July 10, 2012
    1:30 - 2:00pm EDT  

i will keep america the hope of the earth with your help. thank you so very much. thank you! [ cheers and applause ]
so, live from grand junction, colorado, we've seen candidate mitt romney with his first town hall meeting since he held one in euclid, ohio, in may. in about 20 minutes we expect president obama from cedar ripds, iowa. he's expected to deliver an event at kirkwood community
college and we expect him to deliver a speech on job creation and his middle tax cut proposal. this comes a day after the president urged tax cuts for middle class families making under $250,000 a year. while allowing taxes to increase for the wealthiest americans. at an even earlier today house speaker john boehner reacted to the president's remarks. here's a look. [ applause ] >> good morning, everybody. thank you. let me begin by thanking all of you for what you do to help get the american economy going again. you're not going to hear this much in washington because most people in washington never had a real job. and don't really understand that
you have to risk your life savings, risk capital, take out loans to start a business, to hire employees, to buy equipment and hoping that you'll find a customer. hoping that you'll find some business. and most people here in washington don't understand the risk that's involved and what you do to help grow the american economy. but as one who took the same kind of risk that all of you did, i just want to say thanks for what you do for our country and what you do for the communities in which you operate your businesses. listen, as you know i came here as a small business guy. i came here to fight for a smaller less costly and more accountable government. but you know many in washington just haven't quite seen the light as yet. the president and i we get along just fine. but we've got some really different views about how our economy works. as a product of the free enterprise system, i'm a big
believer in the free enterprise system and in limited government here in washington. president's instinct is to meddle, micro manage, manipulate, just look at the stimulus bill. what we're seeing with obama care again is driving up the cost of health care and that's making it harder for small businesses to create jobs. so tomorrow the house once again is going to vote to repeal all of obama care. [ applause ] some say you've already voted 30 times to repeal, dismantle obama care. after the supreme court's ruling we announced that we were going to vote again. the media goes why? you know how they are. why? why? it boils down to one simple
word, resolve. we are resolved to get rid of a law that will ruin the best health care delivery system the world has ever seen. it will bankrupt our country and make it impossible to grow our economy. that's why we're doing it. [ applause ] >> later this round we'll take another round of bills to the floor to reign in the regulatory nightmare that's going on here in washington, d.c. it's not just obama care with its 159 boards, commissions and mandates. it's the epa that's driving many businesses out of america. it's the dodd frank financial services reregulation that another 358 mandates in that bill rules, regulations that are coming. and so we're going to bring in another round of bills to the floor. in addition to the over 30 bills that are sitting in the united states senate.
all of which would reign in the regulatory nightmare in washington and make it easier for businesses in america to expand their business and hire more workers. then all of this is our plan for america's job creators. now listen the president's got a different plan. he started talking about that yesterday, again. for four years the president has been on this crew said to make those who make $250,000 or more pay higher taxes. he talked about it in 2008 when he ran. talked about it in 2009. talked about it in 2010. of course again in 2010 he signed a bill that extended all of the current tax rates for two years. here we are we're back at it again. now -- let's look at what the president wants to do. by raising taxes on those who make more than $250,000, half of those people who are going to be taxed are small business people.
who have passed through entities just like many of you and just like i have. i have a subchapter s corporation. the earnings i made in my business i had to pay personally. why we would want to tax the very people we expect to create jobs in this country makes no economic sense. well maybe he's going to do it because it will have some impact on the deficit. congressional budget office looked at this. and the impact on the budget deficit is negligible. you can't hardly count it why is the president once again beating on this man tra? president can't run on his record because his policies, his economic policies have failed. they've made things worse. as a result he's turned to the politics of envy and division. that's what this is about. nothing but pure politics. listen the american people vote with their wallets. this is going to be a referendum in november on the president's economic policies. the house will vote at the end
of this month to extend all of the current tax rates because it will help us give more certainty to small businesses in our country and help create more jobs here in america which is what the american people want. so we're going to -- you'll see us rise up and do it one more time and send it over to the senate and hope that they'll take some action. listen. we can't raise taxes on the very people that we expect to create jobs. listen, i'm a small businessman at heart. you know that. i don't feel one bit differently than the first day i got here about who i am or what i'm here to accomplish. it's about reining in the size of government here in washington to allow the free enterprise system to grow. allow the free enterprise system to create opportunities that gave every one of us in the room a chance, a chance at the american dream. i came here because if we don't get government in washington under control the future for my kids and your kids, my grand
kids, if i have any and your grand kids not going to be there because we are going to snuff out those opportunities. listen, i was born with a glass half full. i'm an optimist. if i wasn't an optimist i surely wouldn't have come to washington and stayed this long. you have to be an optimist to fight this fight every day and to stand up for america's small business people and do everything we can to preserve those freedoms that we're all entitled to and frankly all accustomed to. god bless you and god bless our country. [ cheers and applause ] a live picture on your screen from cedar rapids, iowa, that's kirkwood community college. we are a few minutes away from president obama making a campaign speech.
we're expecting the president to talk about the economy, job creation and his middle class tax cut proposal. as we wait and until the president begins, we'll bring you some of your phone calls and a look at today's headlines from this morning's washington journal. >> headlines says texas and the u.s. lay out voter i.d. arguments. todd gillman joins us my phone now. give us a brief history of this texas law and how it came to arrive in federal court here in washington. >> well, people have been trying to get a federal i.d. law in texas going back at least about 15 years. in fact, at one point as the republican backers of the law that's being challenged i'd like to point out some liberal democrats at one point actually supported the law as well. it passed the texas house in 2005-2007. but died in the senate.
eventually in the 2011 legislature there was a rule change that the republicans in the senate engineered to make it easier procedural to get past the blocking that was being done. and it passed. and it is -- excuse me, the justice department is challenging it. texas like a dozen other states and jurisdictions around the country are subject to section five of the voting rights act which requires these jurisdictions to get clearance from the justice department before they make any kind of election law changes. any rule changes. any redistricting plans need to be cleared by the justice department although it's actually called precleared. the justice department has denied the preclearance on this. they say that it has a discriminatory effect. and intent because there are lots more hispanics and blacks
who are unlikely to have the sorts of photo i.d.s that would be required under the texas law. >> move this forward it's in district court this week. and take a step back for us nationally beginning with the future of the texas law. what does it mean nationally? lots of states are active in this area? >> there are a lot of states active in this area. some states have managed to enact voter i.d. laws without any sort of problem because they're not under the thumb of the federal government as it were under the voting rights act. those states such as indiana have managed to get it through those cases have gone to the supreme court and been okayed. so there's an enormous amount of resentment in states like texas. why do they get to do it and we don't get to do it. why is it okay in that state and not in our state. this case like most of these cases is destined to go to the supreme court eventually. but at the moment it is as you
said before a three judge panel in federal district court in washington, d.c. where the state of texas is trying to compel the justice department to give it the okay to implement this law. >> as the governor rick perry in texas commented specifically on this, publicly? >> i haven't heard him commenting recently on it. he certainly supported this law. he signed it into law last may, i believe it was. may of 2011. >> what are the implications here for this presidential election cycle? >> that's an interesting question. i don't think there would be any -- any tipping of any election in texas. major election in texas. one where the other if the law is implemented in this election cycle. it is the sort of issue that tends to rile up conservatives. so if the law is blocked it will make them angry. it has made them angry. it has been used as bludgeon
against the obama administration. eric holder is a poster boy for much of the anger directed towards the administration over fast and furious. over this as well. the republicans have been bashing the justice department for stooiming something by many surveys is very popular and popular among demographic and ethnic groups in texas. >> anything else we should know as we continue to track the news here out of texas and the court case in washington? what else should we be looking for? >> i think it's going to be very interesting to see. we've had one day of trials so far. and the state of texas was trying to demonstrate or they started laying the ground work to demonstrate that there was no discriminatory intent that this law requiring a photo i.d. of one sort or another applies
equally to everybody including rich white people and poor hispanic people. they're a little more gloemtic and tactful than that when they say it. so far they really haven't made much -- much inroads in proving that there's any sort fraud on any kind of wide scale that's justified and that's what the justice department and voter fraud that might be deterred or prevented by requiring anybody that presents himself or herself at a polling place to offer a photo i.d. there's almost no evidence that this exists. it occurs sporadically, occasionally, and the chief investigator for the texas attorney general's office was only able to point to four instances in the last decade where someone had tried to commit in-person voting fraud of the sort that we would be directly deterred, so it would
be very interesting to see over the next few days how these arguments play out. on the one hand, the federal government is trying to prove that it discriminates heavily against minorities because they're more likely not to have the kind of i.d. that you need and the state of texas is trying to prove that, well, there are concerns about people coming in and fraudulently casting ballots and that alone, that public concern and elaying that public concern and it's based on it just doesn't seem right to a lot of texans that hypothetically someone could present themselves at a voting place and cast a ballot fraudulently. >> todd gilman is washington bureau chief of "the dallas morning news," thank you on the setup for this case. >> thank you. >> texas, and the u.s. lay out voter i.d. arguments and the
federal requirements on the voter i.d. law opened monday with the justice department voting it could prevent 1.4 million citizens, most of them hispanic or black from voting. time for your calls and lots more written on this this morning and we'll bring it out to you on the table, but maryland, you are up first on this topic. it's marcy on the line for democrats. good morning. >> good morning. i had a suggestion. this voter i.d. thing could be solved with one thing and i'll tell you why i say that's a great idea. it probably would include more people in the voting and when you have a social security number it could have the one, two, it could tell the age of the person and you can't have somebody voting and you have it and all and that would solve --
that right there and it would be honest because you know, you only have one vote per number and you get it from the social security administration. the only thing i would like is that republican voters need to ask questions as to why are the republicans doing this? now i know they may think it's for their benefits, but i do know they want to take over for the power and there's a reason and i believe the social security and medicare. i believe they do want to get rid of it and those people making $30,000 and $40,000 who are in their 40s and think they'll have it, they're not and if the republicans get in there they'll try to use the money to deal with the deficit. >> that was marcy from owens mills, maryland. susie is on the line from central new jersey. good morning, susan. >> good morning. i've lived down in florida for four and a half years and my daughter moved me back to new jersey, and i used to be a
democrat. when i was down in florida i had to show proper toifgz register my car, i got a florida driver's license, we did, i should say. we registered to vote and when we voted in one primary down there. and i stood there for five or ten minutes and if you're legally in this country, no, i used to be a democrat, but i'm sick, i grew up low income. my father died 59 years ago in april, just before i turned 6 years old. my mother never instilled in me the woe is me, folks should feel sorry for me attitude and i'm sick and tired of the cost of welfare. my husband worked 117 hours one week on a part-time job, and i don't like his estate being stolen by this administration. i don't care how much you have. i don't care how little you
have, it's your morals, values and work ethic that determine what type of person you are. >> the caller from new jersey, i thought you were finished there. susie referring to florida one of the states that requires a photo i.d. if you go to the website of the national conference of state legislatures. there's an interactive map there and you can look at each individual state in the country and determine what they have in place. just about half the states have some type of voter i.d. law, and just about a dozen and just fewer than a dozen have committed play in the last couple of years and is where you could do more and a couple of facebook comments writes, one viewer would write, texas may deprive many of the vr of the voting rights that amounts to four or five cases per year and can't help if there
is some other agenda. if you have an i.d. to buy cigarettes and beer to drive, travel, cachet check then you have to have an i.d. to vote in this country. no more excuses to protect the voter fraud scheme, c-span. we're also taking your questions or your comments via twitter at c-spanwj. many ways to get in touch with the program. pittsburgh, you're up. robert, democrat, good morning. >> yes. i have a question for all americans. you know, i'm a retired military person, and i know that during the '60s when they had the problem with the voting and now it looks like we're repeating ourselves. they don't really care about the people. they want power. that's the reason why they're trying to get these voter laws and i have to say, america, wake up. you know how hitler got in
power. look out. pennsylvania, robert, what's required of you when you go to the polls? >> i think if you have a military i.d., a driver's i.d., there are about three or four things that you can have and there are certain people that all of the people are not going to have because, you know, some people may have been born at a certain time when they didn't have a birth certificate. they recorded your birthday in the bible so i don't think some people would have a problem and some people vote in every election and they can't really prove that in the election people have been voting. >> let's hear it from mary from astoria, oregon, independent caller. hi, mary. >> hi. i think the voter i.d. laws are just fine. if you have to vote, you do what you have to do and vote and
people just sit on their heinies and not do what they have to do to vote. i just moved to another state and i had to jump through all types of hoops to get myself registered as a voter, and i did because i want to vote. there's now plenty of time before the election. you know, it's ridiculous and whining about it's discriminating about certain people. they can do what everybody else does in order to be qualified to vote. it's garbage. it's just another scheme by the democrats to be able to get in there and -- and cast votes for dead people and cartoon characters and it's hogwash. it's another one of their tactics. >> and we're going to break away from this recorded program and take you live now to iowa where we are just seeing president obama arriving on stage there in cedar rapids. live coverage here on c-span3. ♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> hello, cedar rapids! hello! it is good to be back! all right! a couple of people i want to acknowledge, first of all, please give jason